And if one plans to wage a war on pseudoscience it certainly can't hurt one's crusade to know how to spell it. ;-)

One final thought: Converting the world to the viewpoint of science involves more than explanation, persuasion, and outreach. It also requires setting a good example. A nonscientist might read your anger-filled SCREAMING posts, and think, "jeez, if that's what science does to a person, I don't want to go near it". It may not be "scientifically correct" to choose a belief system based on how it makes you feel, but in fact that's how humans work. Present science as something that's upsetting and makes people mad, and they'll look elsewhere for something to believe in. Get across the idea that science is nourishing for the soul as well as the intellect, and people will flock to our banner.

That certainly can't hurt. Turning science into a crusade is a bad idea. Folks are intuitively reassured by folks who express with equilibrium and put off by imbalanced expression.

But, most importantly, science is presently losing the 'answer' game and that is why it is held by many not as an either/or proposition but as an adjuctant tool people live with. How many times has MA pointed out faith and science are not in competition? The reason for that is that science has neglected/failed to answer those questions religion does:

"Why am I here?"

Science: human reproduction
Religion: To serve God!

"What happens to me after I die?"

Science: Your body decomposes
Religion: You go to heaven or hell!

"What's the difference between right & wrong?"

Science: We don't have a real answer to that.
Religion: Good is anything God wants you to do!

"Is there any way to immortality?"

Science: We're working on drugs to extend your life.
Religion: You will live eternally with God in heaven if you are good!

"How did the universe get here?"

Science: (insert variable) billion years ago there was a big bang of primordial matter that formed everything around us...

Religion: God created it!

"Why do some people have good lives and others bad?"

Science: Er...excrement happens?
Religion: Bad things happen to those who displease God!

"Why does my 3 year old have leukemia?"

Science: Er...
Religion: He was born in sin!

"I want to be a good person..can you help me with that?"

Science: Er...we have some drugs...
Religion: Obey God and you will be a good person!

"Why are some people evil...like my boss...my mother-in-law..."

Science: Er...they may need prescription drugs...
Religion: They are sinners!

Those are just a few of the things that make science incomplete. Science can answer ALL those questions far better than they do now, but until they do science is like a compartmentalized part of billions of folks lives and they simply don't use it to answer the really big questions.

Give science another 100 years, If science backs off from the trend of over-drugging people and reducing potentially gifted minds, or about 250-500 years if they don't.

And, sadly, there will be lots of folks whom the real scientific answers will be completely lost on, even when they are provided free of charge.

And even more who, even if they may grasp some of the scientific concepts, simply won't like the answers, and will look elsewhere. The scientific answers are not "feel good" answers. Evolutionary development is a heckuva lot of hard work and is not nearly as attractive as simply obeying some rules laid out in some 2000 year old texts as composed by scientific illiterates.

There are also certain genetic limitations to the thought processes and parameters the human mind operates within and for these reasons religion will NEVER be obsolete. Even 10,000 years from now there will be folks who will cling to 'secret' religions in the face of overwhelming scientific answers to ALL the questions I posed above.

Scientific evangelism is not the answer - answering the tough questions and providing the scientific answers is the answer.